Yes he sits on livestreams all day long instead of making edited/scripted videos which get straight to the point.
IDK if he practices, because whenever I do oral arguments, I need to write out relatively tight scripts since the time limits are pretty strict. So everything I do is scripted.
Pretty much why I dropped him. Too much getting rolled up in drama for superchat money, more interested in stretching things out than just dispensing based law pills, and catering to that really weird unbreaded shit.
Pretty much why I dropped him. Too much getting rolled up in drama for superchat money, more interested in stretching things out than just dispensing based law pills, and catering to that really weird unbreaded shit.
Yeah if you want based/accurate legal takes I do text posts on the topics sometimes.
Despite whatever his initial intentions, he embraced the role of grifter entirely. Now the only thing that distinguishes him from regular drama commentators is the ability to parse a legal document.
And that only lets him get a slight headstart on the competition who get someone else to do it for them, and he usually wastes that on the slowest streams known to man.
No offense to small town lawyers, because I think they're very important, but Nick lives in a small town in Minnesota with a population of less than 2,000. The whole county has a population of like 40k.
I always assumed he was basically a traffic ticket, misdemeanor, minor-legal-needs solo practictioner. And I doubt he's practiced in years. Why would he when he has an easier and better paying job?
He went to William Mitchell (today Mitchell Hamline). Again, no offense to practical schools because they're necessary and important, but it's a tier 4 school (admittedly does have one SCOTUS justice alumnus) that is not in the business of training Big Law and major stakes practitioners.
I doubt I've seen more than a cumulative 10 minutes of Nick, but I would take his legal opinions with a heavy grain of salt.
Most of his legal analysis comes in the form of his live play-by-play commentary on ongoing trials. And for that, you really don't need anything much more than an understanding of the rules of evidence and procedure for the relevant jurisdiction. So in that regard, his background is more than adequate and his legal analysis is fine.
He rarely covers other stuff, like major SCOTUS decisions, and for those I would agree with you on taking his analysis on those with a grain of salt.
I still really like Nick, but he has succumbed to the same stay-at-home-Dad disease as Viva Frei did when he quit his law practice and achieved YouTube stardom/self-sufficiency.
They complain constantly about being run off their feet and never "have any time". But they are actually prioritizing picking up their kids from school or social activities over their actual primary job of creating content and streaming. The womanly daytime chores come first (despite them both having wives), their careers and the audience come second.
Rekieta has missed over half of the Darrell Brooks trial (which he admits he hates) because he doesn't stream during the daytime if his kids need rides to their homeschool social activities on a given day.
It's great that Rekieta and Viva are good fathers involved in their kids' lives, but they gone so far with the Work-From-Home thing that chaffeuring takes precedence over actually doing their freelance jobs.
Then they have the gall to constantly complain about their hectic schedules to their audiences who simp for them and could only dream of such flexibility and luxury.
I still like Viva too, though as a Canadian I've drastically scaled back from watching his content since his surreptitious move to Florida that I took personally.
He's just not as interesting to me as a commentator opining on Canadian topics from afar.
I can't stand Barnes. Nobody should take his legal analysis at face value. Robert's big problem is that he will freely flow from stating what the law is with what he thinks the law ought to be without differentiating the two. And so anybody who is not familiar with what the law actually is in an area could be duped into believing that he's stating what the law actually says.
Viva's milquetoast Canadian personality combined with his ignorance of American law means that he almost never pushes back on Robert's legal takes, no matter how retarded they are.
rofl, that's practically ALL of Youtube. Have you ever seen a TheQuartering video? They're always 10+ minutes to game the algorithm, while he only has enough commentary for 2 - 5 minutes, tops. Or Tim Pool? Don't get me started on that guy.
Nick Rekieta really seems to provide low Information Per Second.
The guy spends 8 hours discussing 1 story very slowly. Its sad. The guy could cover so much more
Yes he sits on livestreams all day long instead of making edited/scripted videos which get straight to the point.
IDK if he practices, because whenever I do oral arguments, I need to write out relatively tight scripts since the time limits are pretty strict. So everything I do is scripted.
He does YouTube because he hates being a lawyer.
Pretty much why I dropped him. Too much getting rolled up in drama for superchat money, more interested in stretching things out than just dispensing based law pills, and catering to that really weird unbreaded shit.
It's a pretty shitty job in a lot of ways.
Yeah if you want based/accurate legal takes I do text posts on the topics sometimes.
Despite whatever his initial intentions, he embraced the role of grifter entirely. Now the only thing that distinguishes him from regular drama commentators is the ability to parse a legal document.
And that only lets him get a slight headstart on the competition who get someone else to do it for them, and he usually wastes that on the slowest streams known to man.
No offense to small town lawyers, because I think they're very important, but Nick lives in a small town in Minnesota with a population of less than 2,000. The whole county has a population of like 40k.
I always assumed he was basically a traffic ticket, misdemeanor, minor-legal-needs solo practictioner. And I doubt he's practiced in years. Why would he when he has an easier and better paying job?
He went to William Mitchell (today Mitchell Hamline). Again, no offense to practical schools because they're necessary and important, but it's a tier 4 school (admittedly does have one SCOTUS justice alumnus) that is not in the business of training Big Law and major stakes practitioners.
I doubt I've seen more than a cumulative 10 minutes of Nick, but I would take his legal opinions with a heavy grain of salt.
Most of his legal analysis comes in the form of his live play-by-play commentary on ongoing trials. And for that, you really don't need anything much more than an understanding of the rules of evidence and procedure for the relevant jurisdiction. So in that regard, his background is more than adequate and his legal analysis is fine.
He rarely covers other stuff, like major SCOTUS decisions, and for those I would agree with you on taking his analysis on those with a grain of salt.
I still really like Nick, but he has succumbed to the same stay-at-home-Dad disease as Viva Frei did when he quit his law practice and achieved YouTube stardom/self-sufficiency.
They complain constantly about being run off their feet and never "have any time". But they are actually prioritizing picking up their kids from school or social activities over their actual primary job of creating content and streaming. The womanly daytime chores come first (despite them both having wives), their careers and the audience come second.
Rekieta has missed over half of the Darrell Brooks trial (which he admits he hates) because he doesn't stream during the daytime if his kids need rides to their homeschool social activities on a given day.
It's great that Rekieta and Viva are good fathers involved in their kids' lives, but they gone so far with the Work-From-Home thing that chaffeuring takes precedence over actually doing their freelance jobs.
Then they have the gall to constantly complain about their hectic schedules to their audiences who simp for them and could only dream of such flexibility and luxury.
I like Viva Frei. But holy **** that guy needs a producer. (Or train his kid to be a producer like Bret Weinstein)
The guy is incompetent AF with his sound/video. I just skip to the part with Robert Barnes
I still like Viva too, though as a Canadian I've drastically scaled back from watching his content since his surreptitious move to Florida that I took personally.
He's just not as interesting to me as a commentator opining on Canadian topics from afar.
Yep. Hard to take someone who took their skin out of the game seriously.
I can't stand Barnes. Nobody should take his legal analysis at face value. Robert's big problem is that he will freely flow from stating what the law is with what he thinks the law ought to be without differentiating the two. And so anybody who is not familiar with what the law actually is in an area could be duped into believing that he's stating what the law actually says.
Viva's milquetoast Canadian personality combined with his ignorance of American law means that he almost never pushes back on Robert's legal takes, no matter how retarded they are.
Viva is Jewish and a stalwart defender of genital mutilation, so he is compromised and can't be trusted.
rofl, that's practically ALL of Youtube. Have you ever seen a TheQuartering video? They're always 10+ minutes to game the algorithm, while he only has enough commentary for 2 - 5 minutes, tops. Or Tim Pool? Don't get me started on that guy.
Yeah I can’t stand Tim Pool. Too slow and always covering his ass.